[MD] Annotations to LC

[Adrie Kintziger]

This is an important remark, David,it made me think back to the transcript
of the observer-interview wich still resides on Dr MC Watt's
Robertpirsig.org.

quote from the interview(copyright Mc watt, Pirsig)

"RP: Most of the army guys were horrible to Koreans, they called them gooks
and beat them up whenever they could. And we were hated in turn. It was
kind of like Iraq in a way. I was assigned to malarial control in charge of
all these local labourers. The caretaker was a kid about 16, and he spoke
perfect English. I said: 'How in hell did you learn English that well?' And
he said: 'I just picked it up.' This guy was another of these prodigies,
you know, but he had no school. So I paid for him to go to school - $16.
This changed my relationship with the Koreans. I started to teach them
English. The Koreans and I became good friends and they gave me a Korean
chess set. I told them one time the most marvellous thing about the English
language is that in 26 letters you can describe the whole universe. And
they just said: 'No'. That was what started me thinking. In the East, the
basis of experience is not definable. That 16 bucks set me on the road to
Zen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It becomes cristal clear that he wanted to keep the bridge between east and
west,separating the flux of life,immidiate expierience,from
descritions of it.
16 bucks of enlightment.

an aside for John.

He also names Whitehead in the interview, but not in a context that
can point towards congruence.But he is clearly not hiding that he did read
Whitehead.
The formulation of the Koreans however speaks for itself, "No",
one cannot define....The basis of.....
and thus this deviates from Whiteheads attempts to define Quality
itself.But including all western philosophys.

These are some toughts.
Adrie


2016-11-18 13:40 GMT+01:00 <david at goodmetaphysics.com>:

> Tuukka wrote:
>
> But as a solution to the mind-matter-problem this is a rhetorical one,
>
> since Quality is an undefined concept. The mind-matter problem is a
>
> dialectical problem. Feel free to find Pirsig's MOQ to solve that
>
> problem for you if it was a rhetorical solution you were looking for in
>
> the first place. Usually, however, a dialectical solution would've been
>
> sought for, such as the one provided by the AMOQ.
>
> djh:
>
> In Lila Quality isn’t just an undefined concept. It is broken up into
> Dynamic Quality and static quality which is defined.  The structure of the
> MOQ does indeed follow a logical pattern.  But that logic is based on
> experience and Quality not starting with dialectic for no reason and going
> on from there.
>
> "Dialectic, which is the parent of logic, came itself from rhetoric.
> Rhetoric is in turn the child of the myths and poetry of ancient Greece.
> That is so historically, and that is so by any application of common sense.
> The poetry and the myths are the response of a prehistoric people to the
> universe around them made on the basis of Quality. It is Quality, not
> dialectic, which is the generator of everything we know."
>
> a, pre, code, a:link, body { word-wrap: break-word !important; }
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>



-- 
parser